Burnham: Measures of Proper Motion Stars 
No other measures of the small star. The proper motion of 
9 Ceti is given : 
Auwers 
0*387 
in 
80? 7 
Paris 
0.389 
in 
82.5 
Porter 
0.385 
in 
81.0 
Boss 
0-397 
in 
80.0 
DM (17°) 57 
(9-6. 
..10.9) 
R. A. o h I7 m 11 s 
Deck 
+ 37° 55' 
1909.573 
4°42 
63*47 
•589 
4-55 
63.48 
•592 
4-50 
63-57 
1909.58 
4.49 
63-51 
By mistake Ball measured this star instead of the variable 
star which is 31 s f. 
54 Piscium (6.1...11.0) 
R. A. o h 33 m 7 s 
Deck + 20 0 36' 
1907.444 
91*25 
I2i"76 
.485 
91.75 
122.40 
.502 
91.63 
122.00 
.523 
91-95 
122.06 
1907.49 
91.64 
122.05 
The following are all the measures of this star: 
1852.69 
io 4!28 
98*51 
in 
02 
1866.92 
100.47 
105.27 
in 
02 
1907.49 
91.64 
122.05 
4 n 
P 
The proper motion of the principal star is: 
Measures 
o"6n 
in 
23 i °4 
Auwers 
0.601 
in 
232.7 
Boss 
0.596 
in 
231.0 
1877.59 4-47 64"90 in B 1 
1878.40 4.07 63.48 2n B 1 
Evidently little or no change. 
R Andromedae ( 8 . 3 ... 10 . 9 ) 
R. A. o h 17" 1 42 s Deck + 37 0 55' 
1909.589 144-32 84^69 
.592 144.33 84.49 
1909.59 144-32 84.59 
The principal star DM (37 0 ) 58, is variable and reddish. 
The measures by Ball of the last preceding star were intended 
for R Andromedae. 
DM ( 33 °) 99 (8.5...9.5) 
R. A. o h 37” 7 s Deck + 33 0 12' 
Prof. Abetti (A. N. 4453) has called attention to the proper 
motion of this 8.5 m star, which he finds to be: 
o"48o in 315?1 
This is obtained by comparing it with a star of the same 
magnitude about 8?5 following, and 9^5 south. This star is 
DM (32 0 ) 129. Both stars have good meridian positions, with 
an interval of nearly forty years, and the proper motion found 
results therefrom, assuming the comparison star to be prac¬ 
tically fixed. There is a better and much nearer star for this 
purpose of only 9.5 m, and that is DM (32 0 ) 120. It is safe to 
infer that a star of this magnitude has no motion which need 
be taken into account in the micrometer measures. The fol¬ 
lowing measures connect the two : 
DM (30°) 89 (9.0. ..9.4) 
R. A. o h 32™ 26 s Deck + 30° 22' 
Abetti (A. N. 4461) finds for this small star, near 5 Andro- 
medae, a proper motion of : 
o ".26 o in 265° 6 
There is no near suitable star for comparison. I have there¬ 
fore connected it with the 9.3 m star DM (30°) 90: 
1911.471 121?2o 233^97 
.509 121.40 233.43 
.545 121.57 233.51 
1911-51 121.39 233.64 
For comparison there is only the following: 
1875 I22°3 22 7"7 A. G. Camb. 
1895.8 122.3 232.5 Oxford (photo.) 
For the photographic position, a scale value of 300'fo is 
applied to the difference of the measured coordinates. The two 
positions are not very accordant. The first compared with the 
measures would imply a proper motion of o"i9 in 270°, while 
from the other it is (>"25 in 230°. 
DM (33 0 ) 99 and (32°) 120 
1910.895 i8i?20 286^49 
.931 181.18 286.05 
.933 180.89 286.11 
1910.92 181.09 286.22 
The only positions for comparison are: 
1855 179° 324" dm 
1894.7 181.8 292.0 Potsdam 
From these it may be inferred that the star in question has 
some motion, in declination at least. Further measures with 
the micrometer, after a suitable interval of time, will settle 
the question, and give a definite value to the movement. 
There is another DM star of about the same magnitude, 
8.3 m, nearly preceding, and near enough in declination to be 
measured directly with the micrometer: 
DM (33 0 ) 99 and (33 0 ) 96 
A RA A Deck 
1825 
— 105*4 
+ 7 " 
Weisse 
1855 
105.2 
54 
DM 
1894.7 
104.7 
39-8 
Potsdam 
1910.9 
104.5 
40.2 
P 
3 
